Wikipedia Sucks!

Read all about the new stuff coming in Everipedia 2.0, which is getting announced June 1st and due for public beta soon after.

The Wikpiedia Killer arises!

I just wait for Beeblebrox to tell me what to think.....

Wasn't the last version supposed to be the Wikipedia killer? How's that working out so far? Cracked the top 10 in traffic yet? Top 100? Top 10,000?

When did Wikipedia crack the top ten?

Comparing and contrasting what Wikipedia was doing at this same stage of its evolution (by my calculation mid-2005), and it isn't even a competition.

No Paul, thanks, no wiki products for me anymore.
Don't take it personal but I am retired.

Still spamming, I see...

RfB

No problem Timmy. Paul is always welcome here, he is a real good guy. And what about the monopolistic wikipedia spamming powered by Googgle.....................? So a bit promoting here is not any problem.

Poet gave this link on WP.

Take Wikipedia with a pinch of salt, co-founder says


And I told you before Paul I absolute believe in a blockchain encyclopaedia with crypto money, even much more than in the bitcoin what is in my opinion a modern variant of our Dutch tulip bull, but only with created content. Because that generates value. And now Everypedia turned out to be a clone of wikipedia with a one size fits all approach what didn't work om WP either.
And believe one thing of me about European regulation, they works indeed out as Roundup, and will kill in a few years this kind of this "free bicycle for all projects" too. So I don't think it is not wise for investors to step in this project in this form.

]Beeblebrox wrote:Short version of the (already short) article: Everipedia pays Larry Sanger to say disparaging things about WP, and make it sound like blockchain makes EP way better because reasons.

Not true. Larry is a decent man and if Wikipedia had not been the the cheap whore of silicon Valley what Larry didn't and why they have kicked him out the wiki house the situation had now been complete different and for sure this kind of products had had a chance to do fair business.
But because of Wikipedia with its let's liberate a bike and Any Rand mentality the EU has taken now measures who will work out as digital RoundUp and will kill any wikiproduct. And that is the plain true, Bee.

Hands off of Larry! Larry is a genius.

And what do we have with Everipedia? Wikipedia articles, sometimes with stuff tacked on!

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Den ... _Holodomor
This was last edited in 2017 and looked at nine times before I showed up. Actually mentions Fraud, Famine, and Fascism by Douglas Tottle, a book that Ukrainian nationalists have been trying to bury since 1991.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Sov ... E2%80%9333
Straight copy of Wikipedia original, down to the illustration.

I'm sure there are others, I use these pages as a test because they are obscure.

That is exactly what they have been doing (and what most WP "competitors") have done: scraped WP without attribution. The CC license requires some kind of attribution for all of the WP editors who wrote it originally (and even the ones who did nothing useful apart from trivial corrections/vandalism/removal thereof/etc, but ended up in the histories). Copying over the histories is possible but would be a HUGE pain and a resource sink, just to satisfy the rather-vague CC 4.0 license.

Conceivably the WMF could sue Everipedia, but it would likely result in bad publicity for the WMF. As long as the use is "apparently noncommercial" and at-least-pretends to follow the same CC license, anyone can scrape the hell out of WMF projects. Or so it seems right now.

I'm not certain, but I think it should be adequate to provide a link to the article history on Wikipedia. If Wikipedia loses the history, too bad.
If that is not enough, then a copy of the history could be attached. It could even have the links to the Wikipedia article, for detail. That would not be resource-intensive. What is resource intensive is a full article dump, which contains the exact text of every revision.

WMF doesn't own the copyright. The main problems of Everypedia are they have no preference in the search engines and the changing Zeitgeist. Wiki's have so much competitors people can spent there time on, the simple are not interested in a old fashion internet product where it a clone from is.
And about that CC license, the copyright is not owned by WMF of the content. And keep in mind only total clean material can be licensed, copyvio remains copyvio and content with poison, rats and sometime a scorpion in it remains the same if you clone it, it doesn't improve. And that can't be fixed by adding history, Abd.

And in Europe they will be hit as hard as Wikipedia by article 13/17 in the future.